Animal Rights/Liberation

Towards an Animal Standpoint: Vegan Education and the Epistemology of Ignorance

by Richard Kahn

Forthcoming in Epistemologies of Ignorance and the Studies of Limits in Education,  Erik Malewski and Nathalia Jaramillo (eds.), Information Age Publishing

Les debemos algo a los animales salvajes-Torres Aldave

by Mikel Torres Aldave

Preface -- Chinese edition of Critical Pedagogy, Ecoliteracy, and Planetary Crisis: The Ecopedagogy Movement (2012)

by Richard Kahn

A statement on the meaning of this book in its English edition is included, and I consider the state of Chinese... more A statement on the meaning of this book in its English edition is included, and I consider the state of Chinese society and its educational opportunities from an ecopedagogical perspective, arguing both that the foundations exist for it and that they MUST exist because China (like the United States) is now one of the future's crucial educational problems that must be taken up if there is to be anything short of a staggering global collapse. The Deweyan Chinese educational philosopher, Tao Xing-Zi is upheld as a possible forerunner for how ecopedagogy might proceed as culturally relevant within a Chinese framework.

Noblesse Oblige: Theological Differences between Humans and Animals and What They Imply Morally

by Ryan Patrick McLaughlin

Oxford Journal of Animal Ethics 1, 2 (Fall 2011): 132-149

The author reviews the work of select theologians, ethicists, and biblical scholars who suggest that the difference... more The author reviews the work of select theologians, ethicists, and biblical scholars who suggest that the difference between humans and animals should not serve solely as an ascription of a special status to humans, but also as the foundation for a responsibility that humans bear toward animals.  As an added reflection, the author explores common categorical differentiations in systematic theology: God and creation; human and nonhuman; elect and non-elect.  In the first and last of these categorical differentiations, unique identity entails both a special status and responsibility.  The latter is normatively directed to those who are categorically different.  As such, the categorical difference between humans and animals establishes a foundation for moral concern.

Evidencing the Eschaton: Progressive-Transformative Animal Welfare in the Church Fathers

by Ryan Patrick McLaughlin

Modern Theology 27, 1 (January 2011): 121-46

The author aims to retrieve and develop creatively a strand of Christian thought, stretching from early Christian... more The author aims to retrieve and develop creatively a strand of Christian thought, stretching from early Christian interpretations of biblical data through the hagiographies of the saints into modern Christian thought, which provides a foundation for concern over the welfare of nonhuman animals. To provide the framework for this strand, the author explores the theology of Irenaeus of Lyons and Ephrem the Syrian. First, he considers their positions regarding the place of nonhuman animals in protology and eschatology. Then, he notes their view that the created order is in via toward its eschatological consummation. With this framework in place, he turns to other voices in the Christian tradition, including the hagiographies of the saints, in order to further develop the framework. Ultimately, the author suggests that, within this particular strand of Christian thought, the further a human being progresses along the path of redemption, the more he or she ought to serve as a prolepsis of eschatological hope, which includes peaceful relationships between humans and animals.

La teoría de los derechos de los animales de Tom Regan-Torres Aldave

by Mikel Torres Aldave

[2012] Operation Splash Back!: Queering Animal Liberation Through the Contributions of Neo-Insurrectionist Queers

by Michael Loadenthal

TO BE published Spring 2012 in the Journal of Critical Animal Studies Special Edition: Intersecting Queer Theory and Critical Animal Studies.

The neo-insurrectionist network known as Bash Back! has contributed to the queering of the animal liberation discourse... more The neo-insurrectionist network known as Bash Back! has contributed to the queering of the animal liberation discourse through the publication of their 2010 communiqué entitled, “Bash Back!ers in Support of Autonomous Animal Action Call For Trans-Species Solidarity With Tillikum.”  The politic developed by the larger movement of neo-insurrectionist Queers, as exemplified by Bash Back!, has served to disrupt anthropocentric notions of human-liberator, animal-captive that form the centerpiece of the animal liberation discourse.  Through their appropriation of an attack wherein an orca whale killed its trainer at SeaWorld, Bash Back! problematizes not only the normalized domestication of non-human animals for entertainment, but also the discourse used to critique such enslavement.  Through satirical posturing and a liberatory framework, Bash Back! attempts to draw intersectional connection between the systems of domination that enslave both non-human animals and non-heterosexual Queers.  Through a queering of this understanding of liberation, Bash Back! serves to shift the animal liberation discourse away from the human centric “total liberation” framework, and towards an anti-speciest framework proposed herein, termed “total solidarity.”

[2010] The Production of ALF/ELF Tactical & Operational Intelligence: Moving Towards Active Participation within a Continuum of Involvement

by Michael Loadenthal

Center for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence, [written within a 'security studies' framework so please excuse the liberal use of Statist terrorism rhetoric...but hey, we all write for an audience from time to time]

The execution of politicized acts of violence by individuals and groups cannot exist as the sole indicator of an... more The execution of politicized acts of violence by individuals and groups cannot exist as the sole indicator of an actor‟s involvement with terrorism. The identity of “terrorist” and the status of “involved” in terrorist acts must be understood as a gradated categorization that exists with fluidly over a time period of sustained political engagement. This continuum, discussed herein as a scale of terrorist involvement, can contain a veritable infinite degree of distinct identities, accounting for increasingly nuanced levels of engagement. With this complexity in mind, this essay attempts to develop four broad categorical labels for describing terrorist involvement, discussing them in relation to their legality as well as their utility in terrorist operations. The examples utilized for discussion come from the participants and supporters of the Animal Liberation Front and the Earth Liberation Front, two groups typically conflated under the “eco-terrorist” label of “special interest” or “single issue” terrorism. Through examination of three types of actors within this movement, People for the Ethical treatment of Animals, Peter Young and the clandestine cell network termed “the family,” this essay seeks to examine the increasingly difficult task of determining terrorist involvement; a task more complex as fighters move from the formalized training camps of Amman and Colombo to the apartments and computer desktops of North American cities.

[2010] The Earth Liberation Front: A Movement Analysis

by Michael Loadenthal

Center for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence [written within a 'security studies' framework so please excuse the liberal use of Statist terrorism rhetoric...but hey, we all write for an audience from time to time]

The Earth Liberation Front is a radical environmental movement that developed from the ideological factionalization of... more The Earth Liberation Front is a radical environmental movement that developed from the ideological factionalization of the British Earth First! movement of the 1990s. Its ideological underpinnings are based in deep ecology, anti-authoritarian leftism highlighting its critique of capitalism, a commitment to non-violence, a collective defense of the Earth, and a warranted feeling of persecution by State forces. In its current form, the Earth Liberation Front is a transnational, decentralized network of clandestine, autonomous, cells that utilize illegal methods of protest by sabotaging and vandalizing property. The small unit cells are self-contained entities that can operate without the support of external entities such as financiers or weapons procurers. Tactical and operational knowledge is developed and shared through commercially available books written by the broader environmental movement throughout the last four decades, as well as inter-movement publications produced by the cells and distributed through numerous sympathetic websites. Membership in the Front can be understood as occurring on two levels, the covert cell level and the public support level, both of which operate in tandem to produce and publicize acts of property destruction. At the cell level, individuals conduct pre-operational reconnaissance and surveillance, develop and construct weapons systems, carry out orchestrated attacks, and announce their actions to support groups and media while maintaining internal security and anonymity. At the aboveground level, support entities help to publicize attacks carried out by cells, respond to media inquiries and other public engagements, identify and coordinate aid to imprisoned cell members, and develop and distribute sympathetic propaganda produced by, and in support of affiliated individuals. This case study uses the history of the Earth Liberation Front‟s United States attacks as its unit of analysis, and seeks to outline the ideology, structure, context and membership factors that constitute the movement.

cfp_animals_in_political_theory

by Steve Cooke

CFP: MANCEPT Workshops in Political Theory, Session on “Animals in Political Theory”

MANCEPT Workshops in... more CFP: MANCEPT Workshops in Political Theory, Session on “Animals in Political Theory”

MANCEPT Workshops in Political Theory - Ninth Annual Conference

Manchester Centre for Political Theory (MANCEPT), University of Manchester, 5th - 7th September 2012

Workshop on Animals in Political Theory

Abstracts are invited for a workshop on Animal in Political Theory at the MANCEPT Workshops in Political Theory.

Conference website: http://manceptworkshops2012.wordpress.com/

Derechos y deberes de nuestros hermanos inferiores [Rights and duties of our inferior brothers and sisters]

by Lorenzo Peña

Publ. in Animales no humanos entre animales humanos
ed. by Jimena Rodríguez Carreño
Madrid: Plaza y Valdés, 2012. Pp. 277-328
ISBN 978-84-15271-15-4

The paper claims that such animals as are compelled to live within the scope of human societies are somehow members... more The paper claims that such animals as are compelled to live within the scope of human societies are somehow members thereof with ensuing rights and duties. They are endowed with reason and will, even if to a lower degree tahn humans are. While they are bound to obey their masters and serve them in accordance with reasonable constraints, they are entitled to protection, consideration, welfare, humane treatment, and civil personhood. The best solution to the animal-rights issue is not, therefore, to waive their status of owned entities (as nonhuman slaves), but to enact a legal status of nonhuman members of human society.

Key-words
Animal rights, human duties, horses, legal persons

Resumen
Aquellos animales que se ven forzados a vivir dentro de las sociedades humanas son, en cierto modo miembros, de las mismas, lo cual acarrea deberes y derechos correlacionados entre sí. Son seres dotados de voluntad y entendimiento, aunque sea en medida inferior a la humana.
Estando obligados a obedecer a sus dueños y a servirlos de conformidad con reglas razonables de dominación, tienen derecho a la protección, al bienestar, a los cuidados, a la consideración y a un trato benigno, lo cual habría de traducirse en el reconocimiento de su personalidad civil. La mejor solución para el problema de los derechos animales no es, pues, abolir su actual situación legal de bienes en propiedad (esclavos no humanos), sino la de beneficiarse de un nuevo Estatuto Jurídico del animal doméstico y cautivo, como miembros no humanos de la sociedad humana.

Palabras-clave
Derechos animales, deberes humanos, caballos, personalidad jurídica

A Vindication of the Rights of Brutes

by Peder Anker

Edward Westermarck and animal rights

by Kari Väyrynen

Submitted to Faravid 2012

Ewe Robot -- from 'Philip K. Dick and Philosophy'

by Alf Seegert

Published in the 2011 anthology 'Philip K. Dick and Philosophy'.

Animals Matter to God: Rediscovering Creation Guardianship

by Philip Johnson

Co-authored with Ruth Pollard
Sacred Tribes Journal 2/2 (2005): 57-125.
Copyright (c) 2005 Philip Johnson & Ruth Pollard

This is the original online version of the paper before it was reformatted with page numbering.

Also of relevance to the paper and the subject broadly refer to the 2006 radio broadcast on the ABC programme Encounter. Presenter: David Rutledge. Among the panel of interviewees is Rev Dr Andrew Linzey (Oxford), myself, Barbara Allen (Chaplain Lort Smith Animal Hospital), Binoy Kampmark (Selwyn College, Cambridge), and Islamic practitioner Mohamed el-Mouelhy.
An audio-file download and a written transcript can be obtained at:
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/encounter/animals/3342398

I am currently preparing two different books on animals and theology, one popular and one for an academic audience. Both books will involve a different theological paradigm to the one that is presented in the paper here.

There are contemporary Christians for whom the subject of animals is important on ethical and theological grounds,... more There are contemporary Christians for whom the subject of animals is important on ethical and theological grounds, just as there have been in the past. As a small step towards generating further positive discussion, we present this essay, but we acknowledge that what we say here is very cursory. It is a preliminary foray only and does not pretend to be
comprehensive or to deal with all the serious issues related to human relations with animals.

Activists and jurists who have been concerned with animal issues have sought, in part, to redress some problems by arguing for legislation, or even animal rights covenants, based on the juridical concept of guardianship for humans. Although the concept of guardianship is not a new one, what is new is how it has recently been developed beyond its traditional application to children and incompetents and extended to animals. So part of this discussion will delve into the history of law related to guardianship, before analysing the views of the three
proponents of a legal guardianship model for animals. Later in the paper, a fourth view, which fits within the ambit of the legal guardianship model, but is not confined merely to the law, will be presented as the most expansive and generous of the views blending juridical and theological insights.

The critical methodology of this discussion seeks to integrate critical perceptions from theology, analytic philosophy and jurisprudence. The discussion shall briefly examine the fundamental dilemma of defining and justifying rights. It is argued, inter alia, that rights as properly understood as titles implies relationships, which in turn points the inquiry to the transcendent. Then it will be argued that contemporary moral
theories and philosophies of jurisprudence that seek to promote the cause of animals are unable to ultimately justify the grounds for inalienable rights for animals. In line with the insights of contemporary analytic philosophy, this discussion then highlights the need for a transcendental perspective, in which a transcendent-immanent Creator supplies the needed title for inalienable rights. Finally, the discussion proceeds to
examine the classical Christian doctrines of creation, redemption and eschatology that provide the essential fulcrum for the theoretical content and praxis of inalienable rights for animals, especially the recovery of creation guardianship.

Psubraty. Jak pomóc zwierzętom?

by Krzysztof Wychowałek

Making Animal Protection a Mainstream Political Issue

by Kim Stallwood

Creatures in Captivity and Ethics

by Poppy Valentine

Prisons. Factory States. Low-Wage Workers. Child Sex Trade. Animal Abuse for: Clothing, Entertainment and Food. I... more Prisons. Factory States. Low-Wage Workers. Child Sex Trade. Animal Abuse for: Clothing, Entertainment and Food. I really could go on with other outlets of injust captivity, but this covers some major ones.

Joseph Ritson, Percy Shelley and the Making of Romantic Vegetarianism

by Tim Morton

Published in Romanticism 12.1 (2006), 52–61.

Percy Shelley's copy of Joseph Ritson's groundbreaking book on vegetarianism reveals a lot about his politics and... more Percy Shelley's copy of Joseph Ritson's groundbreaking book on vegetarianism reveals a lot about his politics and philosophy.

Who's Harming Whom? A PR Ethical Case Study of PETA's Holocaust on Your Plate Campaign

by Carrie Packwood Freeman

CONFERENCE PAPER: “Who’s Harming Whom? A Public Relations Ethical Case Study of PETA’s Holocaust on Your Plate Campaign.” Public Relations Division. International Communication Association (ICA) annual conference in San Francisco. May 2007. This was the inspiration for the more general/broader study I published in the Journal of Mass Media Ethics called "A Greater Means to the Greater Good"

Little existing research explores the special ethical challenges most applicable to social movement organizations as... more Little existing research explores the special ethical challenges most applicable to social movement organizations as they struggle to use persuasive communication campaigns to redefine accepted social practices into social problems. As a case study, this paper evaluates People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals' (PETA) controversial 2003-04 international "Holocaust on Your Plate" vegetarian campaign to determine its strengths and weaknesses from the standpoint of public relations ethics, using TARES principles and ethical theory as a guide. Issues of respect and minimizing harm take center stage. Both speciesist and nonspeciesist perspectives are considered.